On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 16:38:37 +0100, RustyHinge
<rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:

>So, I have several hundred of the Paracetamols and several days' worth
>of morphine skulking in a box of meds. I used to save such things for a
>charity which collected them for places/countries which had inadequate
>supplies, but they desisted for some reason. I keep them just in case I
>find something similar, before they go out of date.

Don;t worry about the date. Unless there's degradation of the
packaging they'll last for longer than you will - the dates are not
indicative of the drugs 'going off' in any way or olosing their
efficacy.

>I have lots of other surplus-to-needs meds which have been discontinued.
>It's a crime to send them back to the dispensary for destruction when
>some poor sod is crying out for them.

It's not allowed any more. Counterfeit drugs exist and have sometimes
enetered the official supply chain, so they won't take the risk these
days.

Anyway, the cost of collecition, sorting, and distribution would
vastly out wiegh the cost of the drug itself - in essence they're both
cheap as chips - so there's just no incentive to do it.
--
Ace
http://www.chaletbeauroc.com/

On 30/09/2023 17:40, Stephen Packer wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 16:38:40 UTC+1, RustyHinge wrote:
>
>> I have lots of other surplus-to-needs meds which have been discontinued.
>> It's a crime to send them back to the dispensary for destruction when
>> some poor sod is crying out for them.
>
> It's a crime to share them with someone to whom they weren't prescribed.
>
That could explain why the charity suddenly didn't want them any more?

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

On 01/10/2023 09:03, Ace wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 16:38:37 +0100, RustyHinge
> <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I have lots of other surplus-to-needs meds which have been discontinued.
>> It's a crime to send them back to the dispensary for destruction when
>> some poor sod is crying out for them.
>
> It's not allowed any more. Counterfeit drugs exist and have sometimes
> enetered the official supply chain, so they won't take the risk these
> days.

Since Brexit we don't give a fuck any more. Well, slight hyperbole, it
means we're out of the FMD which provided extra checking to try to keep
counterfeit drugs out of the system.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/implementing-the-falsified-medicines-directive-safety-features

Mind you, it meant we could skip over the FMD code in the system, which
was nice.

On 10/1/2023 1:03 AM, Ace wrote:
>
> Anyway, the cost of collecition, sorting, and distribution would
> vastly out wiegh the cost of the drug itself - in essence they're both
> cheap as chips - so there's just no incentive to do it.

Hah. "Cheap as chips." They make a profit even when insurance is paying
for them. My insurance stopped (on a technicality,) and the price
skyrocketed. Meaning their profit increased ~8 fold.

--
The erstwhile Thomas
FJR1300, R1200GS & ST1100 (in memoriam)

Turby <xsurf@xmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/1/2023 1:03 AM, Ace wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, the cost of collecition, sorting, and distribution would
>> vastly out wiegh the cost of the drug itself - in essence they're both
>> cheap as chips - so there's just no incentive to do it.
>
> Hah. "Cheap as chips." They make a profit even when insurance is paying
> for them. My insurance stopped (on a technicality,) and the price
> skyrocketed. Meaning their profit increased ~8 fold.

One of my prescriptions is now about $93/90 days supply. It was around
$141/90 days previously, so I suppose that's an improvement. However,
as I'm on Medicare, they are paying roughly $450/month (!) on top
of what I pay, which may or may not put me in the 'donut hole' next
year. I'm keen to find out if the price the government pays gets
renegotiated thanks to President Biden's initiative.

The only thing that saved me from going into the 'donut hole' this
year was the fact that I bought up a stock of the drug when I was
in Saudi Arabia. I showed the pharmacist a photo of my prescription
and that was good enough for him at the three pharmacies me and my
co-worker cleaned out. .

--
FJR1300A, GL1000, KLR650A6F, EX250J9A, DR200SE, Vespa Ciao

On Monday, 2 October 2023 at 22:41:56 UTC+1, Mark Olson wrote:

> One of my prescriptions is now about $93/90 days supply. It was around
> $141/90 days previously, so I suppose that's an improvement. However,
> as I'm on Medicare, they are paying roughly $450/month (!) on top
> of what I pay, which may or may not put me in the 'donut hole' next
> year. I'm keen to find out if the price the government pays gets
> renegotiated thanks to President Biden's initiative.
>
> The only thing that saved me from going into the 'donut hole' this
> year was the fact that I bought up a stock of the drug when I was
> in Saudi Arabia. I showed the pharmacist a photo of my prescription
> and that was good enough for him at the three pharmacies me and my
> co-worker cleaned out. .
<snip>

In the UK I was about to feel very smug since I pay about £100 a year and
get all my prescriptions filled for free and once over 60 they will be free..
If I had a condition such as diabetes they'd be free anyway (for some reason
high blood pressure doesn't count).

Then I looked up how much my prescriptions would cost for a month's supply
and if I took generic pills (which is what I get from the pharmacy) they'd be
just under $20 a month in the US. So no where near as much as I thought.
That's for a cocktail of ace-inhibitors, diuretics, calcium channel blockers.

Still don't understand why your country votes for such a shitty health service
that seemingly achieves little apart from enriching doctors and the medical
industry, it doesn't even seem to manage costs for the country. Then again,
I don't understand much about why my country votes for what it does.

Boots wrote:
> Naproxen is a fairly effective long term NSAID. After a crooked my back at the
> water park a few years back my step-daughter recommended and worked brilliantly.
> Luckily I can buy the full strength OTC unlike the nanny state.

Works like magic for gout flare-ups.
Also works nicely when my internal leg scaffolding gets uncomfortable.
And for when my dodgy shoulder complains too painfully about a long ride.

You can buy them OTC in the USA too.

On 03/10/2023 10:17, Stephen Packer wrote:
/snippetry/

> Still don't understand why your country votes for such a shitty health service
> that seemingly achieves little apart from enriching doctors and the medical
> industry, it doesn't even seem to manage costs for the country.

I'm thankful for the NHS and its 'free at the point of use' policy,
albeit prescriptions are not 'free at the point of delivery'. If I'd
been 'over there' I'd be bankrupt by now and owing $millions.

As a decrepit old wreck I get all my meds f.o.c., visits from quacks,
ditto, hospital stays, ditto, and so-on.

> Then again,
> I don't understand much about why my country votes for what it does.

I'm with you there, mostly. Especially with the present batch.

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

Sqirrel99 wrote:
> Boots wrote:
> > Naproxen is a fairly effective long term NSAID. After a crooked my back at the
> > water park a few years back my step-daughter recommended and worked brilliantly.
> > Luckily I can buy the full strength OTC unlike the nanny state.
>
> Works like magic for gout flare-ups.

It can do. Last attack I had before I went on allopurinol, Naproxen did nothing and I ended up on crutches til I got my hands on some colchicine. Now *that* works like magic.

On 03/10/2023 10:17, Stephen Packer wrote:
>
> Then again, I don't understand much about why my country votes for
> what it does.

People are idiots.

--
Eddie eddie@deguello.org

ogden wrote:
> Sqirrel99 wrote:
>> Boots wrote:
>>> Naproxen is a fairly effective long term NSAID. After a crooked my back at the
>>> water park a few years back my step-daughter recommended and worked brilliantly.
>>> Luckily I can buy the full strength OTC unlike the nanny state.
>> Works like magic for gout flare-ups.
>
> It can do. Last attack I had before I went on allopurinol, Naproxen did nothing and I
> ended up on crutches til I got my hands on some colchicine.
> Now *that* works like magic.

While simultaneously being properly evil shit !

When I first went to my GP to tell him I had gout he said that I didn't,
that I had injured my toe and that I should go to A&E.
I duly went to A&E where they rolled their eyes, told me that my GP was
an idiot, confirmed the gout with a blood test and gave me colchicine
which promptly sorted it, then prescribed Naproxen for ongoing use.

Sqirrel99 wrote:
> ogden wrote:
> > Sqirrel99 wrote:
> >> Boots wrote:
> >>> Naproxen
>
> >> Works like magic for gout flare-ups.
> >
> > It can do. Last attack I had before I went on allopurinol, Naproxen did nothing and I
> > ended up on crutches til I got my hands on some colchicine.
> > Now *that* works like magic.
>
> While simultaneously being properly evil shit !

Yeah. One of those drugs that you Absolutely Do Not Fuck About With.

> When I first went to my GP to tell him I had gout he said that I didn't,
> that I had injured my toe and that I should go to A&E.

Yeah, I had much the same, albeit it at an injuries clinic, as I hadn't put 2+2 together by that point. First visit was told definitely not gout. Return visit, was told definitely gout. Ho hum.

> I duly went to A&E where they rolled their eyes, told me that my GP was
> an idiot, confirmed the gout with a blood test and gave me colchicine
> which promptly sorted it, then prescribed Naproxen for ongoing use.

I had to ask a few times for the allopurinol, as I'd rather treat the cause than the symptoms. Haven't had an attack since, so all my naproxen and colchicine is well out of date, if probably still perfectly effective.

On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 11:09:20 -0700, Turby <xsurf@xmail.com> wrote:

>On 10/1/2023 1:03 AM, Ace wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, the cost of collecition, sorting, and distribution would
>> vastly out wiegh the cost of the drug itself - in essence they're both
>> cheap as chips - so there's just no incentive to do it.
>
>Hah. "Cheap as chips." They make a profit even when insurance is paying
>for them. My insurance stopped (on a technicality,) and the price
>skyrocketed. Meaning their profit increased ~8 fold.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say there, but presumably something
about the US heakth system that we wouldn't understand.

Anyway, my point about cheap as chips is talking about manufacturing
costs specifically of Opiates and Paracetamol, meaning that there
would be no financial incentive for medical charities to try and reuse
over-prescribed stock from individuals even if they were allowed to do
so.

--
Ace
http://www.chaletbeauroc.com/

ogden wrote:
> I had to ask a few times for the allopurinol, as I'd rather treat the cause than the symptoms. Haven't had an attack since, so all my naproxen and colchicine is well out of date, if probably still perfectly effective.

Completely the opposite here; I was offered it, unprompted, when my GP
rang me for a 'one year review'. Since my uric acid was only borderline
I decided I'd rather not have to take something continuously if I didn't
need to, so stayed with Naproxen. After the initial flurry of flare-ups
it has settled down to around once per year - and I can catch it early
enough to treat it before it gets nasty.

Stephen Packer <stephen.packer@gmail.com> wrote:

> Then I looked up how much my prescriptions would cost for a month's supply
> and if I took generic pills (which is what I get from the pharmacy) they'd be
> just under $20 a month in the US. So no where near as much as I thought.
> That's for a cocktail of ace-inhibitors, diuretics, calcium channel blockers.

I'm also on a number of extremely common generic meds which are "free"
to me, and Medicare isn't paying much for them either.

> Still don't understand why your country votes for such a shitty health service
> that seemingly achieves little apart from enriching doctors and the medical
> industry, it doesn't even seem to manage costs for the country. Then again,
> I don't understand much about why my country votes for what it does.

Because, just like in your country, there are powerful interests that
benefit from convincing the poorly informed that it's to their benefit
to enrich the super-rich even more. Every dollar spent on redundant
administration costs due to the balkanization of the health care
'insurance' industry, is a dollar that could have been spent on lab
tests, doctor and nurse salaries, medicine, etc.

"I don't want the government involved in my health care!" Sure- you'd
rather have some profit-driven entity deciding to fuck you over for
a few more bucks.

If people actually voted in their own self-interest, we'd already
have a much better and cheaper universal health care system, instead
of one that is designed to extract as much money as possible, while
grudgingly delivering some level of care almost as an afterthought.

T.R. Reid's book is still worth a read, despite being out of date. I've
given copies to a few people.

"The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and
Fairer Health Care"

ISBN-13 978-0143118213

--
FJR1300A, GL1000, KLR650A6F, EX250J9A, DR200SE, Vespa Ciao

Sqirrel99 wrote:
> ogden wrote:
> > I had to ask a few times for the allopurinol, as I'd rather treat the cause than the symptoms. Haven't had an attack since, so all my naproxen and colchicine is well out of date, if probably still perfectly effective.
>
> Completely the opposite here; I was offered it, unprompted, when my GP
> rang me for a 'one year review'. Since my uric acid was only borderline
> I decided I'd rather not have to take something continuously if I didn't
> need to, so stayed with Naproxen. After the initial flurry of flare-ups
> it has settled down to around once per year - and I can catch it early
> enough to treat it before it gets nasty.

That's the autoimmune reaction though. Gout at its worst. Even without regular, sustained gout attacks (and one a year is still unpleasant) you've still got the hyperuricemia. Crystals in your joints doing damage over time (even if your immune system doesn't notice most of the time) and an increased risk of kidney stones, neither of which are on anyone's wishlist.

We all make our choices though. I couldn't see much of a downside to allopurinol, other than having to pay a tenner a few times a year to top up my stockpile, so jumped straight on it. YMMV.

On 03/10/2023 11:00, ogden wrote:
> Sqirrel99 wrote:
>> Boots wrote:
>>> Naproxen is a fairly effective long term NSAID. After a crooked my back at the
>>> water park a few years back my step-daughter recommended and worked brilliantly.
>>> Luckily I can buy the full strength OTC unlike the nanny state.
>>
>> Works like magic for gout flare-ups.
>
> It can do. Last attack I had before I went on allopurinol, Naproxen did nothing and I ended up on crutches til I got my hands on some colchicine. Now *that* works like magic.

Oh yes, colchicine is great. I still keep some around as even on
allopurinol I can get the occasional flare-up, though it's very rare.

On 03/10/2023 13:11, Sqirrel99 wrote:
> ogden wrote:
>> Sqirrel99 wrote:
>>> Boots wrote:
>>>> Naproxen is a fairly effective long term NSAID. After a crooked my
>>>> back at the water park a few years back my step-daughter recommended
>>>> and worked brilliantly. Luckily I can buy the full strength OTC
>>>> unlike the nanny state.
>>> Works like magic for gout flare-ups.
>>
>> It can do. Last attack I had before I went on allopurinol, Naproxen
>> did nothing and I
> > ended up on crutches til I got my hands on some colchicine.
>> Now *that* works like magic.
>
> While simultaneously being properly evil shit !

Only if you take it for more than three days. I heeded my doctor when
she told me that taking it after three days would give me the shits.

On 03/10/2023 18:13 Eddie penned these words:
> On 03/10/2023 10:17, Stephen Packer wrote:
>>
>> Then again, I don't understand much about why my country votes for
>> what it does.
>
> People are idiots.
>
Some of them are not even that clever.
--
Ian

"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of
the last priest"

On 03/10/2023 05:41 Mark Olson penned these words:
> The only thing that saved me from going into the 'donut hole' this
> year was the fact that I bought up a stock of the drug when I was
> in Saudi Arabia. I showed the pharmacist a photo of my prescription
> and that was good enough for him at the three pharmacies me and my
> co-worker cleaned out. .

A US friend of mine was asking about sourcing drugs from the UK was it possible
with an overseas prescription. Asked my tame pharmacists assistant and
apparently not, prescription needs a BMA number even a private one. Ah well it
was for epipens which are difficult to find here.
--
Ian

"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of
the last priest"

On 03/10/2023 17:17 Stephen Packer penned these words:
> On Monday, 2 October 2023 at 22:41:56 UTC+1, Mark Olson wrote:
>
>> One of my prescriptions is now about $93/90 days supply. It was around
>> $141/90 days previously, so I suppose that's an improvement. However,
>> as I'm on Medicare, they are paying roughly $450/month (!) on top
>> of what I pay, which may or may not put me in the 'donut hole' next
>> year. I'm keen to find out if the price the government pays gets
>> renegotiated thanks to President Biden's initiative.
>>
>
> In the UK I was about to feel very smug since I pay about £100 a year and
> get all my prescriptions filled for free and once over 60 they will be free.
> If I had a condition such as diabetes they'd be free anyway (for some reason
> high blood pressure doesn't count).

My insurance sadly doesn't cover drugs. My BP drug runs to ~RM70 a month so
about £12, sadly, madam's cocktail of BP, cholesterol, blood thinners etc runs
to about 10x that.

> Still don't understand why your country votes for such a shitty health service
> that seemingly achieves little apart from enriching doctors and the medical
> industry, it doesn't even seem to manage costs for the country. Then again,
> I don't understand much about why my country votes for what it does.

Not of course US but insurance based medicine blows goats. I've had to front the
costs for the imaging and initial diagnosis for my trigger finger. Finally the
consultant wants to do something so now I have to wait with bated breath to see
if the minor op is authorised. As long as it is I can then retrospectively
reclaim the costs for diagnosis.

--
Ian

"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of
the last priest"

ogden wrote:
> Sqirrel99 wrote:
>> ogden wrote:
>>> I had to ask a few times for the allopurinol, as I'd rather treat the cause than the symptoms. Haven't had an attack since, so all my naproxen and colchicine is well out of date, if probably still perfectly effective.
>> Completely the opposite here; I was offered it, unprompted, when my GP
>> rang me for a 'one year review'. Since my uric acid was only borderline
>> I decided I'd rather not have to take something continuously if I didn't
>> need to, so stayed with Naproxen. After the initial flurry of flare-ups
>> it has settled down to around once per year - and I can catch it early
>> enough to treat it before it gets nasty.
>
> That's the autoimmune reaction though. Gout at its worst. Even without regular, sustained gout attacks (and one a year is still unpleasant) you've still got the hyperuricemia. Crystals in your joints doing damage over time (even if your immune system doesn't notice most of the time) and an increased risk of kidney stones, neither of which are on anyone's wishlist.
>
> We all make our choices though. I couldn't see much of a downside to allopurinol, other than having to pay a tenner a few times a year to top up my stockpile, so jumped straight on it. YMMV.

>Crystals in your joints doing damage over time (even if your immune
>system doesn't notice most of the time) and an increased risk of
kidney >stones, neither of which are on anyone's wishlist.

No argument there and if/when my uric acid creeps up, I'll be with you.

On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 05:40:03 -0700 (PDT), ogden <eldaifo@gmail.com>
wrote:

>> > It can do. Last attack I had before I went on allopurinol, Naproxen did nothing and I
>> > ended up on crutches til I got my hands on some colchicine.
>> > Now *that* works like magic.

>> While simultaneously being properly evil shit !

>Yeah. One of those drugs that you Absolutely Do Not Fuck About With.

Intrigued, I read it's wikipedia article. Some choices snippets
follow:

- Colchicine has a narrow therapeutic index, so overdosing is a
significant risk.
- Deaths – both accidental and intentional – have resulted from
overdose of colchicine
- ...colchicine poisoning by overdose (range of acute doses of 7 to 26
mg) begins with a gastrointestinal phase occurring 10–24 hours after
ingestion, followed by multiple organ dysfunction occurring 24 hours
to 7 days after ingestion, after which the affected person either
declines into multiple organ failure or recovers over several weeks.

So, yes, clearly one Does Not Fuck About With It !!!

--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

On 29/09/2023 18:27, Pipl wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 12:24:58 +0100, YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 29/09/2023 11:14, RustyHinge wrote:
>>> <guessing> Omeprazole is probably a stomach acid production inhibitor.
>>> Blind Bambi wha t'other is - that's what a search engine's for.
>>>
>>
>> engines
>
> Ahem.
>
Guilty! (of not reading the "a")

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

Champ wrote:
> - Deaths – both accidental and intentional – have resulted from
> overdose of colchicine
> - ...colchicine poisoning by overdose (range of acute doses of 7 to 26
> mg) begins with a gastrointestinal phase occurring 10–24 hours after
> ingestion, followed by multiple organ dysfunction occurring 24 hours
> to 7 days after ingestion, after which the affected person either
> declines into multiple organ failure or recovers over several weeks.

Even if suicidal, how on earth could anyone decide on /that/ as the way
to go ?